10.08. Written Claims for Compensation.

CourtKansas
Kansas Workers Compensation Settlement Reporter 10.08. Written Claims for Compensation SummariesChapter 1010.08 Written Claims for CompensationSee Also,Herrada v. United Bldg. Centers, Docket No. 1,028,032. (August 2006) See Also,Franco-Lopez v. Loma Vista Nursery Inc., Docket No. 1,019,608. (October 2005). See Also,Swayne v. Cates Service Co., Docket No. 265,630. (September 2004). April 2004. (Order) In order to receive workers' compensation benefits, a claimant must serve written claim for compensation upon the employer within 200 days after the date of accident. At the original preliminary hearing, held July 31, 2003, claimant placed into evidence what was marked as Claimant's Exhibit 4 and described as a note titled "To Whom It May Concern," written and signed by claimant, dated September 20, 2001. It describes the incident wherein claimant was kicked in the knee and discusses the fact that she was provided an Ace bandage. In this instance, claimant submitted Claimant's Exhibit 4, a handwritten statement describing the incident, at the request of Ms. Cornejo. Ms. Cornejo acknowledged that the handwritten document, which was presented to her, had to be prepared in order for claimant to obtain workers' compensation medical treatment. The Board concludes that Claimant's Exhibit 4, from the July 31, 2003 preliminary hearing, satisfies the requirements of K.S.A. 44-520a. Thornton v. Wildwood Outdoor Education Ctr. Docket No. 1,009,701. March 2004. (Award) Claimant was released by her treating physician without restrictions and with no indication for ongoing treatment. Additionally, claimant later went to her supervisor and requested a return to the doctor. This request was refused. Pursuant to Blake and Shields, claimant was notified that ongoing medical treatment had ceased and was no longer authorized. Therefore, the written claim statute of limitations had began to run. Here, however, claimant submitted compensation treatment forms, created by her authorized treating physician, to the respondent for the purpose of obtaining ongoing medical care. These forms satisfied the requirements of K.S.A. 44-520a and written claim was timely served on the respondent. Reed v. Bagcraft Corp, Docket No. 237,018. March 2004. (Award) Claimant voluntarily quit a job that was within his restrictions which was not good faith therefore that wage should be imputed to him, but because it paid less than 90 percent of his average weekly wage claimant is still entitled to a work disability. Written claim was extended to one year because respondent had notice but did not file an accident report. Respondent argues claimant not disabled so an accident report was not required but Board held subsequent surgery was natural consequence of work injury so claimant was disabled for more than a day. Story v. Aramark Uniform Services, Docket No. 1,007,154 and 1,009,807. March 2004. (Award) Claimant was terminated for cause from an accommodated job that paid at least 90 percent of his pre-injury average weekly wage results in his award being limited to his functional impairment percentage. Chavez v. IBP, Inc., Docket No. 233,298. See Also, Jane R. Terrell v. Training and Evaluation Center For Handicapped of Hutchison, Docket No. 1,006,036 (June 2003) October 2002. (Order) Notice and written claim during an ongoing series of accidents are timely for past, present and future accidents in that series. Date of accident is not a jurisdictional issue on an appeal from a preliminary hearing order and, therefore, will not be decided unless it is necessary to determine whether notice and/or written claim was timely made or if claimant suffered injury by accident arising out of it in the course of employment. Once determination is made that claimant's injury is work-related, there is no need to affix a date nor decide how much his or her pre-existing condition was aggravated. Nature and extent are likewise not jurisdictional issues. Cluck v. Atchison Casting Corp., Docket Nos. 204,983 and 265,534 (October 2002). March 2002 (Award) In order for medical treatment to extend the time for service of a written claim under K.S.A. 44-520a, the evidence must show a relationship between the treatment and the injury. Here the treating physician did not establish a direct casual connection between the surgery and the accident. Jones vs. Winsteads and Winsteads, Docket No. 255,913. October 2001 (Ph) A minor injured on the job is not obligated to satisfy the time limitations of the workers compensation act until a guardian or conservator is appointed to represent the minor. The minor's parent does not qualify as such unless appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction. However, once the age of majority is reached, unless otherwise incapacitated, the claimant is subject to the provisions of K.S.A. 44-509 and must submit a written claim within 200 days of his or her 18th birthday pursuant to K.S.A. 44-520a. Smith vs. Rock Road Car Wash, Docket No. 265,746. March 2001 (Award) Claimant did not provide employer with a written notice of claim. However, the Board taking into consideration the totality of the circumstances, i.e., completion of accident report with the employer's assistance, letters from the worker compensation claims adjuster, and payment of medical expenses and TTD, concluded that the documents claimant completed for the employer and the insurance carrier should be treated as a written claim. Deshazer vs. Classic Floors, Inc., Docket No. 241,169. January 2001 (Award) Under K.S.A. 44-557, an employer must file a report of accident with the Division within 28 days of having notice of a worker's injuries. Respondent argued that the notice requirement was not applicable because claimant continued to perform his regular duties. The Board ruled that the 28 day rule applies to a situation where, as here, claimant's work was directly affected by the injury causing a slow down in claimant's productivity and requiring claimant to rearrange his work schedule to accommodate prescribed physical therapy sessions. Therefore, the claimant was partially incapacitated from performing work for more than the remainder of the day on which he was injured. Respondent's failure to file an accident report within the required time frame extended claimant's written claim time to one year. Hanlon vs. Millbrook Distribution Services, Docket No. 247,411. October 1999. (Award) Time for serving written claim may be extended by medical treatment even when medical treatment is informal. In this case the time was extended where claimant had not been rated, claimant was advised to return for medical treatment on an as needed basis and the respondent did not withdraw its authorization for medical treatment. Flynn v. Lindsborg Community Hospital, Docket No. 227,770. August 1999. (Ph) Where claimant is given an Employer Report of Accident form to fill out after requesting workers compensation benefits, testifies she thought that by completing the report form she had done all that was necessary to receive workers compensation benefits, and after completing the form is provided medical treatment, the Board finds that written claim requirements have been satisfied. Beckner v. State of Kansas, Docket No. 234,591. See Also, Santiago vs. City of Arkansas City, Docket No. 250,203 (August 2000). Respondent's insurance company is an authorized agent for the purpose of receiving an employee's written claim for compensation. July 1999. (Ph) Claimant signed a Form D -- settlement form -- which had the date of accident and description of accident left blank. Respondent later filled in these blanks and submitted the form to the Division of Workers Compensation. Claimant stated he believed the Form D was for the 8/19/94...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT